Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract.This paper is a test of clientelism as an explanatory framework for the challenges faced by the Nova Scotia Liberal government led by Dr. John Savage, 1993–1997. Clientelism, as an explanatory theoretical framework, is a useful tool for interpreting the political events that drove Premier Savage from office only four years after leading his party to a significant majority in the Nova Scotia legislature. The hypothesis presented is that Nova Scotia's political culture supports an environment in which clientelism flourishes. Since the clientelistic dyadic relationship and networks are deeply rooted in the cultural mores of Nova Scotia, they cannot be easily challenged and dismantled by any single political actor or government. Therefore, the Savage government's attempt to capsize this long-established cultural practice is advanced as the prime reason for its failure to endure as a viable administration. Résumé.Cette communication est un test de clientélisme qui tente d'expliquer le cadre dans lequel s'inscrivent les défis auxquels a été confronté le gouvernement libéral de Nouvelle-Écosse mené par le DrJohn Savage de 1993 à 1997. Le clientélisme, en tant que cadre théorique explicatif, est un outil utile qui permet d'interpréter les événements politiques qui ont fait perdre son poste de Premier Ministre au DrSavage quatre ans seulement après qu'il ait mené son parti vers une majorité significative à l'assemblée législative de Nouvelle-Écosse. En fin de compte, l'hypothèse est que la culture politique de Nouvelle-Écosse favorise un environnement dans lequel le clientélisme est florissant. Du fait que la relation dyadique clientéliste et les réseaux sont profondément ancrés dans les traditions culturelles de Nouvelle-Écosse, il est peu probable qu'un acteur unique ou un simple gouvernement puisse facilement les mettre au défi et les démanteler. En conséquence, nous suggérons que la tentative du gouvernement Savage de renverser cette pratique culturelle de longue date est la raison principale pour laquelle ce gouvernement n'a pas réussi à survivre en tant qu'administration.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".